The Islamic history is meaningless?
-
Tried it. No luck. No probs if you find a link please share. Thanks.
Peace
Hope
Peace Hope,
Click on this
?10
I don't live in the U.K. and it works for me.
There was uproar about it. See here
http//mypercept.co.uk/articles/Rethinking_Tradition_Modern_Islamic_Thought.htmHis book "Risala" is almost entirely an argument for his view. If his view was blatantly obvious and mainstream, there would be no need to write a 300 page book detailing the case for it!
Why we dont hear about it? I like the wisdom it is the victor's history that goes to school.
As a sidenote, I bought the English translation of the book for a dirt cheap ?10 including delivery, and plan to read and critically review it in the future. So much to do in so little time.
-
few things i don't understand, if imam shafi made this law, why wasn't there a big uproar if so why don't we hear about it.
how did imam shafi and the other imams get their title..
how would ijma happen?
i can understand why.. you threaten their beliefs. one they have no reason to doubt because so many people follow that path.
There was considerable opposition to Imam Shafi and his hadith enterprise back then. It was essentially a war between the intellectual giants of the day. The objective of the war was to win over the masses, in which Imam Shafi proved himself to be more convincing than his counterparts. The ancient interpreters or the lawyers of the ancient schools of thought like Abu Yusuf, Awza?i and Malik based their legal work on the ?living Sunnah? and through personal judgement interpreted their materials freely to elaborate the law. They were vehemently opposed to Imam Shafi in his contention of equating sunnah with hadith interpretations and giving Hadith interpretations an equal footing with the Quran. The early interpreters defied this trend.
To them sunnah was a living process of interpretation rather than a mere static or constant (Hadith Literature) classifying the words and deeds of the prophet. Sunnah was a living process that was kick started by the prophet who interpreted the Quran during his life time and the activity was taken up by other learned men after the death of the prophet. Hence the interpretative process is a continuous activity that goes on and on till the end of mankind or that of Islam. This interpretative function comprises of the knowledge of the Quran along with critical evaluation of the previous interpretations used in tandem with human reason. Imam Shafi contended that the interpretative function of the prophet was over and above all other interpretations and that it represents as an ideal to other interpretations and was thus equivalent with the Quran as the words and deeds of the sacred prophet. This was another story that Hadith were simply not the words of the prophet but also contained the words of the companions of the prophet but this was deliberately ignored.
To claim that the interpretative function of the prophet was over and above the subsequent interpretations is the epitome of human stupidity. Though Muhammad was a prophet but he was one man, how can a single person attempt to explain all that there is in a holy book preserved for all of mankind for all time to come. Anyhow notwithstanding the fact that the intellectual position of Imam Shafi was tenuous he was able to win over the masses. This in itself proves that he was more deserving of showmanship than the truth anyway. One can easily see the phenomena nowadays with politicians rallying for our votes come up with a scheme to win over the masses and in the next election change their tactics rather than doing anything worthwhile for the people.
We don?t hear about it because we are essentially the people of taqlid(Blind Following) and our priests(sheiks and imams) go a long way to make sure that we don?t hear anything they do not want us to hear. We don?t study this in schools not at our homes nor anywhere else because of the overwhelming influence of the people of taqlid in our society and in our lives. It is only by individual effort that we can attempt to arrive at the truth. Majority of the Muslims I know don?t even know what Ijtihad is so how can one expect them to know the whole story. You can try this yourself and ask Muslims at random what ijtihad is and you will be surely taken aback by their ignorance. Wakas has put it nicely that it is surely the victor?s history that goes to school.
Imams in sunnism get their titles by the virtue of knowledge that they possess. There is no other criterion in sunni Islam. In shiasm however imams get their titles by the virtue of their birth that is whether they are born in the lineage of the ?Ali? or not (This was before the occultation after the occultation the scenario is different). There is no actual title in Islam as per se but people are known by the extent of their knowledge. Imam Shafi and other imams of that time were knowledgeable men but than even knowledgeable men make mistakes as is abundantly clear.
Ijma or consensus happen when if for example there are 75 interpreters in some area or country and based on their individual interpretations they think a certain matter is to be dealt in such a manner. Naturally variances will be present in their interpretations (on account of their different reasoning or consideration of different variables that affect the matter on hand) as to how the matter is to be settled, so they come to a consensus among themselves as to how the matter or the law is to made to address the problem on hand. It is possible that not all 75 interpreters will agree so a clear majority should suffice. The decision that they have come to is relevant as long as the presence of new variables do not make them irrelevant in case of which the process is to be repeated again. With changing variables the process goes on forever as the law is updated according to changing times.
Some Quotes,
?How can anyone compel another person to ??follow him blindly? By claiming himself to be something(to be divine) that he is not.?
Ahmad ibn Hanbal said "Not one of the scholars of hadith touched an inkwell nor a pen except he owed a huge debt to al-Shafi`i."
-
We don?t hear about it because we are essentially the people of taqlid(Blind Following) and our priests(sheiks and imams) go a long way to make sure that we don?t hear anything they do not want us to hear. We don?t study this in schools not at our homes nor anywhere else because of the overwhelming influence of the people of taqlid in our society and in our lives.
100% Agree on this... my sunni murrobi (priest / teacher on religion) repetitively stated that we must always recite this mantra "SAMINA WA ATONA" (We hear and we obey) on any rulings / concepts / commandment decided by "ulema"... they always try to turn us into 'zombies'.. and drop our 'brain' down the gutter... This also combined with the dogma of "ULEMA WARATSATUL ANBIYA" (The scholars is the inheritor of prophethood) for the justification on why we should "SAMINA WA ATONA" to them..
It is only by individual effort that we can attempt to arrive at the truth.
Again. .this is what happened to me.. once I had enough 'nerve' to really start using my own brain, faces the risk of turning into 'apostate' (thus condemned by hell fire based on my 'previous suniism' belief) and start to apply criticism to my own faith and way of thinking.. only by then the truth start to came out bit by bit...
Majority of the Muslims I know don?t even know what Ijtihad is so how can one expect them to know the whole story. You can try this yourself and ask Muslims at random what ijtihad is and you will be surely taken aback by their ignorance. Wakas has put it nicely that it is surely the victor?s history that goes to school.
Many of the muslims.. i rephrase that.. sunnis knew what Ijtihad is.. but they always being brainwashed that 'ijtihad' is only to be performed by the 'ulema' / 'priest' / 'scholars'... yet for 'common folks', we should SAMINA WA ATONA to them... since they're the inheritors of prophethood (ULEMA WARATSATUL ANBIYA).
Ijma or consensus happen when if for example there are 75 interpreters in some area or country and based on their individual interpretations they think a certain matter is to be dealt in such a manner. Naturally variances will be present in their interpretations (on account of their different reasoning or consideration of different variables that affect the matter on hand) as to how the matter is to be settled, so they come to a consensus among themselves as to how the matter or the law is to made to address the problem on hand. It is possible that not all 75 interpreters will agree so a clear majority should suffice.
Ijma is the bases of what we know today as "Democratic System"..
The differences with the "Sunniism Ijma of Ulema" is, in "Democratic System" the consensus should be taken from all of individuals within the population, and if a majority of them agreed, then it is settled. The process of 'ijma' is not limited to some 'elites' titled as "Ulema".. The modern 'democratic system' was based on a belief that 'all people are created equals and should be considered as such'.Salam / Peace
-
100% Agree on this... my sunni murrobi (priest / teacher on religion) repetitively stated that we must always recite this mantra "SAMINA WA ATONA" (We hear and we obey) on any rulings / concepts / commandment decided by "ulema"... they always try to turn us into 'zombies'.. and drop our 'brain' down the gutter... This also combined with the dogma of "ULEMA WARATSATUL ANBIYA" (The scholars is the inheritor of prophethood) for the justification on why we should "SAMINA WA ATONA" to them..
Again. .this is what happened to me.. once I had enough 'nerve' to really start using my own brain, faces the risk of turning into 'apostate' (thus condemned by hell fire based on my 'previous suniism' belief) and start to apply criticism to my own faith and way of thinking.. only by then the truth start to came out bit by bit...
Many of the muslims.. i rephrase that.. sunnis knew what Ijtihad is.. but they always being brainwashed that 'ijtihad' is only to be performed by the 'ulema' / 'priest' / 'scholars'... yet for 'common folks', we should SAMINA WA ATONA to them... since they're the inheritors of prophethood (ULEMA WARATSATUL ANBIYA).
In reality, this view is designed to stifle independent thought among Muslims and to confine the right to understand and explain Islam to Muslim jurists. This is completely contrary to the spirit of Ijtihad because it essentially says that reason shall be employed only when the texts are silent and no medieval scholar has addressed the issue under scrutiny. Reason, according to this viewpoint, is the last resort for understanding the will of God. For those who hold this view, opening the doors of ijtihad would make no difference, since their very conception of it is impoverished and limited.The second view, often espoused by non-jurists and particularly by those who advocate some form of Islamic modernism and liberalism, envisions ijtihad more broadly. For modernist Muslims I believe that ijtihad is about freedom of thought, rational thinking and the quest for truth through an epistemology covering science, rationalism, human experience, critical thinking and so on.
-
Thanks for the summary Wakas it seems like an interesting read.
I wonder what happened to the ?kalam? people.
I?m trying to understand how Shafi convinced the muslims of the hadith.
You said in the summary
?Early muslims did not give precedence of Muhammad's sunna over other sunnas, such as the sunna of the early caliphs or early companions. The sunna term was not exclusive to Muhammad. There were no rigid distinctions about sources of religious law, i.e. it wasn't concrete that Muhammad's sunna could be used as a source of law.?
A lot of sunni?s will argue because they lived in the time of the prophet they know/knew the ?sunnah? and were not of need of hadith.
Shafi must had alluded that hadith = sunnah. It makes no sense (to me) why it?s so strongly held today without that conviction, or why after much strive people took up shafi?s opinion. Maybe it was something else God knows. But definitely when I get in a discussion with people about hadith or even just mentioning ?that?s not in the Quran? I get questioned ?do you reject hadith? How can you reject the sunnah!? I wonder why sunnah equated to hadith all because of shafi? amazing what one person can do.Anyway another thing, hadith?s in Bukhari and Muslim although they?re predominately about the apparent life of prophet Muhammed, it also includes ?companion?s sunnah? and interpretation. Abu Huraira gives his interpretations to things, also Umar. Not sure about others haven?t looking into it in depth but i?m aware of those two. So it makes me think, Sunni?s will follow a book claiming to follow the sunnah of the prophet but they should really call it ?sunnat alsahaba?. Muhammed didn?t verify them for one, and they contain sahabi interpretations + sunnah.
You know what?s bad the system of verification of hadith uses hadith to verify itself. What other history do we know of the companions other than from hadith? And funnily there are hadiths that contradict each other. Another issue, if the isnad(transmission) is good it doesn?t mean the matn(context) is. Apparently the matn is part of the criteria of hadith verification. So the scholars who accept the matn that clearly goes against Quran have something blocking their sight.
I just got towards the end of the summary he mentions content needs to be analysed. Totally agree.
Zees
So did Bukhari live in the time of imam Shafi?Why would sheikhs want to deny truth? They?re prob as blindly into it as the followers. I think most people who read about islam or have an interest have an idea about ijtihad but those who adopt islam as a culture probably not.
i understand they got their title due to virtue, however sunni?s limited it to the 4.
Shias and their imamate are 12 and even not all born in the lineage get the imama title but the sayeed title. Bit twisted. I just find it odd how the 4 imams are idolizedDefinitely we all make mistakes even the most knowledgeable amongst us.
You gave an example of ijma, i don?t think it?s as simple. But kinda like a voting system except with discussion it could work. I think people do their own ijma in their daily lives it?s just not so serious (well maybe for some)
Jafar I don?t believe democratic system is proper ijma, a democratic system can allow for immoral/unlawful conduct. Ijma is about upholding good through consensus through understanding. Democratic claim to do that though it?s not always as it seems. Though i do get your perspective
-
Slam All,
Below is a timeline of the history of Islam. Major events are in bold.
c. 570 CE Birth of Muhammad.
c. 610 CE Muhammad receives first vision in a cave near Mecca.
c. 610-22 CE Muhammad preaches in Mecca.
622 CE Hijira - Muhammad and followers flee to Medina.
Islamic calendar (AH, Anno Hegirae) begins.
624 CE Muslims successfully attack Meccan caravans at Badr.
625 Muslims are defeated by Meccans at Uhud.
630 Muslims capture Mecca. Ka'ba is cleansed, pilgrimage rites are Islamicized, tribes of Arabia vow allegiance to Muhammad
632 Death of Muhammad. Abu Bakr chosen as caliph.
632-33 Wars of ridda (apostasy) restore allegiance to Islam
633 Muslim conquests (Futuhat) begin.
633-42 Muslim armies take the Fertile Crescent (Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia), North African coast, parts of Persian and Byzantine Empires
c. 650 Caliph Uthman has the Qur'an written down.
656 Uthman is murdered; Ali becomes fourth caliph.
657 Battle of Siffin. Mu'awiya, governor of Syria, claims the caliphate.
659 Arbitration at Adruh is opposed by Ali's supporters.
661 Ali is murdered; Mu'awiya becomes caliph. Beginning of Umayyad Caliphate (661-750).
680 Death of Husayn marks beginning of the Shi'at Ali ("party of Ali" or Shi'a sect.
685-705 Reign of Abd al-Malik. Centralization of administration - Arabic becomes official written language (instead of Greek and Persian) and Arab coinage is established.
late 600s Ruling classes in East and West Africa convert to Islam.
700-800s Groups of ascetics and mystics begin to form
710 Arab armies enter Spain from North Africa.
732 Muslim empire reaches its furthes extent. Battle of Tours prevents further advance northwards.
747 Revolt defeats the Umayyads.
750 Abu l'Abbas becomes caliph in Iraq
754 Baghdad (Madinat al-Salam, "city of peace" becomes the new capital of the Abbasid empire.
755 Abd ar-Rahman founds an Umayyad Dynasty in Cordoba, Spain.
765 Division within Shi'ites - majority are the modern Imamiyya (Twelvers) who co-exist with Abbasid caliphs; minority are more extreme Isma'iliyaa (Seveners).
786-809 Reign of Harun ar-Rashid, best known through the stories of The Thousand and One Nights.
800s Written collections of Hadith (sayings of the Prophet) are compiled. Sicily comes under Muslim rule.
813-33 Reign of Ma'mun. Theological controversy over whether the Qur'an is created or uncreated and eternal. Center for translation of texts from Greek to Arabic founded in Baghdad.
869-883 Uprisings of black slaves (Zanj) are eventually defeated.
908 First Fatimid caliph in Tunisia.
928 Umayyad Abd ar-Rahman III declares himself caliph in Cordoba.
940 Muhammad al-Mahdi, the twelfth imam, disappears. Twelvers still await the future return of the "Hidden Imam."
945 The Buyids (Persian) invade Baghdad and take power from caliph.
969 Fatimids gain power in Egypt and attack Palestine, Syria, and Arabia. Cairo (Al-Qahira, "the victorious city" is founded.
980-1037 Life of Avicenna, Iranian physician and Aristotelian philosopher.
996-1021 Reign of Fatimid al-Hakim. Hamza ibn Ali forms basis of esoteric Druze religion.
late 900s West Africa begins to convert to Islam
1030 Umayyad caliphate in Cordoba defeated by the Christian Reconquista.
1055 Seljuk Turks take Baghdad; Abbasids now only nominal rulers.
1000s Reconquista takes more of Spain, Sicily falls to the Normans, Crusader kingdoms are briefly established in Palestine and Syria.
1071 Seljuk Turks defeat Byzantines at Battle of Manzikert.
1090 Hasan-i Sabbah takes Alamut in the Persian mountains, the Assassin sect forms around him.
1099 Christian Crusaders take Jerusalem.
1100-1200s Sufi orders (turuq) are founded.
1126-98 Life of Averro?s, Muslim philosopher from Cordoba who sought to integrate Islam with Greek thought.
1171 Fatimid power ends in Egypt with the conquests of Saladin.
1174 Saladin declares himself sultan of Egypt and Syria.
1193 Death of Saladin; most of Crusader states have returned to Islam.
1200s Assassins wipes out by the Mongols. Indian rulers in Delhi take title of Sultan. Spanish mystic Muhyi al-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240) flourishes.
1221 Genghis Khan and the Mongols enter Persia.
1241 Mongols take the Punjab.
1258 Mongols capture Baghdad; city is sacked and caliph is killed. End of Abbasid caliphate.
1281-1324 Reign of Uthman (Osman), who founds the Ottoman Empire. Muslim merchants and missionary Sufis settle in SE Asia.
mid-1300s Ottomans capture Bursa and Iznik and move into Europe.
1366 Capital of Ottoman Empire moved from Bursa to Adrianople.
late 1300s Ottomans take control of the Balkans.
1400s Islam reaches the Philippines.
1453 Mehmet Fatih (rules 1451-81) conquers Constantinople. The two halves of the Ottoman Empire are united and the sultan becomes Byzantine emperor.
1492 Castile and Aragon capture Granada. All Muslims (and Jews) expelled from Spain.
1501 Isma'il (1487-1524) claims to be the Hidden Imam and is proclaimed Shah (king) of Persia. Twelver Shi'ism becomes official religion of Persia.
1516 Ottomans conquer Syria and Egypt.
1517 Ottomans control Mecca and Medina.
1520-66 Reign of Suleyman the Magnificent; Ottoman Empire reaches its zenith. Hungary and coastlands of Algeria and Tunisia come under Ottoman rule.
1526 Babur (Mongolian) seizes the Delhi sultanate and takes control of northern India.
1556 Akbar founds the Mughal dynasty in northern India.
1600-1700s Venetians, Habsburgs, and Russians divide European Ottoman lands between them.
1625 Java comes under rule of Muslim kingdom of Mataram.
1699 Treaty of Karlowitz confirms first substantial losses of Ottoman Empire in Europe.
1700s Muhammad Abd al-Wahhab rejects Sufism and all innovation (bid'a). Founds what becomes the Saudi Arabian kingdom. Hindus regain power from Mughals in northern India.
1738 Mughal empire invaded by the Afghans.
1779 Afghans ousted by Qajar dynasty, which rules Persia until 1925.
1798 Napoleon's expedition to Egypt.
1805 Muhammad Ali becomes governor of Egypt, which becomes independent of the Ottomans, gains control of western Arabia and extends into the Sudan.
1807-76 Tanzimat period. Ottoman Empire undergoes extensive program of modernization in government, law, and medicine.
1830 Greece regains independence from Ottomans.
1850s Non-Muslim Ottoman citizens granted equality with Muslims.
1858 Last Mughal in India is deposed and India comes under British rule.
1876-1908 Reign of Abd al-Hamid II; autocratic and religiously conservative period in Ottoman rule.
1878 Congress of Berlin recognizes independence of Balkan states previously under Muslim rule.
1882-1952 Egypt occupied by the British.
1908-18 Last decade of Ottoman rule. Rise of nationalistic "Young Turks." More liberal policies develop.
1912 Founding of Islamic Union (Sareket Islam), a modernizing movement in SE Asia.
1918 Fall of Ottoman Empire. League of Nations grants Britain mandatory status over Palestine and Iraq, and France over Lebanon and Syria.
1923 Republic of Turkey established. Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) is first president.
1927 Tablighi Jamaat reform movement founded in India.
1928 Ikhwan al-Muslimun (Muslim Brothers) founded in Egypt.
1941 Jamaat-i Islami reform movement founded in Lahore, India.
1945 Indonesia becomes independent republic.
1945-60s Islam spreads to the West with mass migrations from Asia, Africa, and India.
1947 Pakistan founded as an Islamic nation. Islam becomes a minority religion in India.
1957 Independent Malayan state established with Islam as the official religion but guaranteed tolerance.
1960s Familes from SE Asia and North Africa emigrate to Europe and the Americas.
1979 Shah of Iran is overthrown by Ayatullah Ruhullah Khumayni, who establishes strict fundamentalist rule of Shi'a principles.
late 1990s Taliban come to power in Afghanistan.
2001 Muslim extremists attack the United States.
2003 Saddam Hussein ousted by Western forces.